Ehud Olmert, the failure of Annapolis, and the One State Solution

Unbelievable interview with Israeli PM Ehud Olmert is featured in today's edition of Haaretz. Well, maybe not so unbelievable. Olmert is quoted as saying that as soon as a "South African style" struggle for equal voting rights is realized in Israel/Palestine, whereby the whole of the Palestinian population both inside the Green Line and in the Occupied Territories is recognized along one man/one vote lines, "the state of Israel is finished." Aside from officially establishing the thoroughly racist nature of the Israeli state--no surprise to anyone with half a brain--Olmert makes some other fascinating moves in the interview. He claims that any "peace process" will require "patience and sophistication" on the part of the Israelis (time not healing all wounds, but rather enabling apartheid walls and illegal settlements to become facts on the ground); he also lambastes an already-embarrassing "leader," Mahmoud Abbas, calling him "a weak partner [in the peace talks], and, as Tony Blair says, [one who] has yet to formulate the tools and may not manage to do so." Loyal NE readers, may we be the first to inform you: we are through the looking-glass.

Olmert's interview makes a recent "declaration" in the Electronic Intifada (co-written, among others, by Joseph Massad, Ilan Pappe, and Ali Abunimah) seem all the more poignant, if not utterly impossible in practice. In the piece, its authors make all the historically legitimate arguments as to why the "One-State Solution" is the only honest and fair one available; yet, and especially in the light of Olmert's Haaretz interview, it fails to acknowledge that, at the "official" level of Israeli politics, it is a complete and utter non-starter. Such is the paradox faced by the One-Staties: a thoroughly legitimate premise that is, it seems, impossible to realize.

Ahmad on Pakistan, cont

Thanks to NE BFF J. Loose for alerting us to Aijaz Ahmad's latest interview with the Real News, in which he once again sheds light on the current political situation in Pakistan; here, Ahmed discusses the US government's dependence on the Pakistani military, a relationship that the US will maintain even, if necessary, at the expense its support of general Musharraf.

Fear and Loathing in Anne Arundel County

Today is the day (or at least the paltry reenactment) we've all been waiting for since September 1993 in the Rose Garden at the White House. The Annapolis "conference"--complete with its own PowerPoint-style background graphic--has been roundly ridiculed in recent weeks, with Olmert and Bush firmly rejecting any discussion of final status issues such as the status of Jerusalem or the right of return of Palestinian refugees (which would thereby invalidate the racist Zionist project), and Mahmoud Abbas seemingly more willing than ever to kowtow to American and Israeli diktats. We first here provide you with a powerful report from Gaza, courtesy of Laila El-Haddad and the Electronic Intifada.

"If it were easy [achieving the goal of establishing peace between Israel and Palestine], it would have happened a long time ago" said George Bush...and we'll leave it to our faithful readers to fill in the flagrant historical and ideological gaps in this statement.

For now, an article by NE favorites Kathleen and Bill Christison will do more than suffice.

The Democrats and "The politics of Iraq"

Today's New York Times dutifully reports that the Democratic candidates for President, given recent "security improvements" in Iraq, have decided to move beyond Iraq as a political talking point. Acknowledging (and not, it appears, questioning) the "successes" generated by the Bush administration's troop surge, the Democrats have decided to focus on domestic matters that weigh heavily on the American electorate.

This article indeed provides a sense of Democratic (cop-out) sentiment these days, moving from Hillary Clinton's praise of US troops and their ability to accomplish any task put in front of them, no matter how nefarious, misguided, or illegal; to Barack Obama, who simultaneously harps on about the price of oil and speaks of an invasion of Iran; to the Democrats' recent move to enlist Ricardo Sanchez in their efforts to continue blaming Iraqi politicians for the results of the war.

News From Nowhere

Haaretz reports, to no one's surprise, that 'Israel and the PA have failed to reach a joint statement' prior to this coming week's conference in Annapolis, which likely will quickly join Madrid and Oslo in the group of cities that have hosted woefully misguided 'peace conferences' between Israel and the Palestinians, sponsored by the 'honest broker' that the US purports to be.

This among reports that envoys from Saudi Arabia will be present in Annapolis; this promise referred to a perceived 'Arab consensus' to support the talks, despite the fact that the Arab states have continually failed to rally behind the Palestinians for 40 years. Good news, though: Condoleezza Rice has been charged with the task of producing the summit's final statement, should the Israel and the Pa be unable to reach some sort of consensus. Thus spoke Ismail Haniyeh today:

"We realize that this conference was stillborn and is not going to achieve for the Palestinian people any of its goals or any of the political and legal rights due to them."

Unfortunately, we assume he'll be proven right.

Thanksgiving

Computer problems! Stay tuned for a extra-long post tomorrow.

Annapolis Notes 1

In the lead article for yesterday's issue of Counterpunch, Oren Ben-Dor provides some important context for the upcoming Annapolis conference: as we mentioned in a recent NE post, Olmert has stressed that a "core issue" for the talks will be Palestine's recognition of Israel as a "Jewish state." As many critics have pointed out, Palestinian leaders have already recognized Israel as a state, and as Ben-Dor shows, this new wording has important implications. Also addressing this question is Uri Avnery in another article for the same publication. Avnery describes the conference as a "pipedream...without any preceding strategic planning, any careful preparations, anything much at all." Among other things, Avnery reminds us of the Knesset's very recent adoption of a bill that restricts any change of the borders of Greater Jerusalem without a 2/3 majority, in effect banning Olmert from giving up any Palestinian villages annexed to Jerusalem in 1967.